First Impressions: Using the Fujifilm X-Pro1

The Fujifilm X-Pro1 combines traditional rangefinder styling and handling with a 16MP APS-C sensor that features a newly-developed color filter array.

The Fujifilm X-Pro1 is the fourth entry in the company's enthusiast-oriented X-series lineup, following the fixed focal length, APS-C format FinePix X100, the Fujifilm X10 compact and the X-S1 premium superzoom. And while it inherits more than a few features from the X100 - though it notably lacks a built-in flash - the X-Pro1 sits well atop the X-series lineup in both specifications and price. It houses a 16MP APS-C sensor with a novel Fujifilm-designed color filter array that eliminates the need for an anti-aliasing filter, thereby promising sharper images compared to a conventional 16MP camera. It also has a brand new lens mount with an initial offering of three fast prime XF lenses. It has a street price of $1,700 / £1429 for the body only.

Just one look at the retro-styling and rangefinder-inspired controls of the X-Pro1 and it's obvious that Fujifilm is positioning the camera as more than just as a high-end mirrorless competitor. As the company told us back in January at the CES show, it sees the X-Pro1 as a vastly more affordable option to the Leica M9-P. The physical similarities between the two cameras are quite striking, as you can see in the comparison below.

The design and dimensions of the X-Pro1 closely mimic those of the Leica M9-P, yet the X-Pro1 body is 150g lighter, a difference that if anything feels even more pronounced when you pick up the cameras.

For those of us who began photography when film was king, the memory of Fujifilm's own rangefinder tradition is not so long past. And its worth remembering that the classic - and rather hefty - Fuji GW690 series models were lovingly referred to by many as 'Texas Leicas' (everything is 'bigger' in Texas). Understandably then, interest in the X-Pro1 among a certain breed of enthusiasts has been quite high.

Yet even the most loyal Fujifilm fan may have found their excitement about the X-Pro1 tempered by issues surrounding previous X-series releases. The well-documented 'white orbs' issue that has plagued the X10 has proven to be resistant to firmware updates, instead requiring a factory-modified sensor (which we've yet to be able to try out). Our in-depth review of the X100 - the first X-series model - includes an entire section devoted to quirks, eccentricities and outright bugs, some of which, even after multiple firmware updates, still take some of the shine off what is in many respects an outstanding camera.

The X-Pro1 (center) is the latest, and largest addition to Fujifilm's X-series camera lineup, which also includes the FinePix X100 (left) and the X10 (right).

One of the most pressing questions then is whether the X-Pro1 will suffer a similar fate, with its strengths being undermined by significant flaws. We won't have a definitive answer on this until we complete our thorough in-depth review of the camera's operation, performance and of course, image quality.

That said, we've had an X-Pro1 for a short while, and I've had the opportunity to use it pretty intensively, as we gear up for a full review. In this article I'm going to share my experiences based on using the camera in a variety of real-world situations in order to give you a sense of what it's like to actually use this highly anticipated camera.

Comments

I have seen amazing "Fuji X pro1" samples on Scoop.it, don't think there is anything wrong with this sensor after seeing beautiful red tulips, (pre) wedding shots, long exposure times, street photography and many other great "real life"examples...

K-01 is a camera that looks like it is targeted at fashion-conscious, Hello Kitty-loving young women, while the X-Pro1 looks like it's targeted at more serious photographers who like a camera that looks more like a tool, rather than something that looks so whimsical and playful (some might say "toyish")l like the K-01.

Was seriously considering buying one until i saw the samples. These samples are all quit mushy, colors especially red seem wrong. Something is missing. I was expecting a lot more from the new sensor sans AA filter. :(

Well this new Silkypix is just as bad as the old one I've used. So for serious raw work, I'll wait for ACR (no, I won't bother with DXO or Corel/Bibble either though both are good bit better than Silkypix in my experience).

It's too bad, I don't know why perfectly respectable camera makers keep going with Silkypix; it's such awful software that it must detract from sales. I get the Panasonic LX5, because the Leica version came with Adobe Lightroom, but why on earth Fuji or Samsung would make this compromise is beyond me.

+1 definitely wrong red color rendering! I couldn't believe my eyes. I recently bought some orchids for my wife , beautiful red orchids but they turned out to be pink on XP1 image. My wife was upset so was i. The camera definitely is coming back to retailer.

This is for Fuji marketing people:By omitting 35mm from the lens line, you may think you are helping the x100 sales, but in my case you have just lost a new customer.I am not interested in X100 nor in Xpro1 without the 35mm.

Then you're one less person that we have to wait in line for to get this camera. Fuji didn't omit a 35mm lens, just as they didn't omit any other lens possibilities including zooms. They're just simply not available yet.

By the way, had a chance to play with one on Saturday and had my X100 with me (with 1.20 update). Was trying and comparing camera in the shop with not really greatly lit areas and AF on X-Pro1 is miles better.

Also focus ring on the 35mm lens doesn't need so many turns for manual focusing like X100. Camera is surprisingly light but it's very well made and solid.

This camera wasn't developed for F1 races but for street/travel/portrait - and when it comes to these subjects AF is more than capable.

I'd suggest you to look at various user reports, there's quite a few of them.

People who care about photography are always hoping that every camera maker produces something brilliant. Fuji has been showing potential of late, but falling down somewhat when it comes to quality control and detailed implementation. Accordingly, lot of people have been approaching this camera with a mixture of hope and fear. Amadou is suggesting that Fuji has done a pretty good job, which is good news for every camera lover.

This is a "first impressions", not a formal tech review. A big difference.

Fuji has entered the market with a camera that is filling a void that's been left open since the Contax G2 and is also a camera that competes with Leica's pricey M9 at a fraction of the price. As photographers, we should all want Fuji to succeed since it simply gives us more equipment options and brings many of us closer to the ideal camera that so far has yet to exist. ...perhaps until now.

It's not about being a fan, it's about wanting Fuji to succeed since they are the only option currently on the market. If Fuji doesn't succeed were back to square one with nothing.

Hm.The imagery ain't bad at all, but the few landscape pics didn't exactly knock my socks off thus far.My 5D classic does a better job, with strong AA filter, and my brother's D700 exceeds as well.The equation "APS-C + unusual color mosaic - AA filter == FF or better" doesn't work to my eyes, and I have close examined many of the full-sized samples.Maybe it was just the photographer, or processing?Anyway, those picture samples are leaving something to be desired, at least to me. Even my T2i did better during my last vacation!Don't know. Is it my eyes?

Indeed, what I see in the sample (page 5) is exactly the opposite of what the autor wrote: <<Individual blades of grass are distinguishable as opposed to being rendered simply as an undefined green mush.>>Umm... Hello? Are we looking at different pics? It's as mushy as it can be, reminding me of older Panasonic compacts!Of course nobody should judge until a capable raw converter is used, but the written review is just pushing and pulling qualities that simply don't exist!

I think they have a point, the randomness of their CFA kinda reduces resolution if we think about it. As a whole it's equivalent to having the effect of a low pass filter only probably weaker which explains quite sharper judgement by DPR people. The only advantage is Fuji gets away with the cost of the AA filter.

Really, all this banter about image quality is non-sense until we get the Adobe RAW conversion software for the Xpro1. Then we can actually make some direct comparisons and really see what is possible. Silkypix is far from the ideal and jpeg is a very poor basis to compare anything with when were talking RAW capable cameras. So far I've been pretty impressed by the image quality I've seen.

Images from the X-Pro1 at 100% show no blur for portions of the shot that are stationary and in focus. This can be seen on the samples here. Look at the 5DIII samples at 100% and some blur CAN be seen at 100%.

I recently bought the x100 in spite of all the 'camera forum experts' negative commentary about it's poor autofocus and all it's problems... And it was one of the best gear buying decisions I've ever made. The AF is extremely capable(even for fast moving subjects). And the firmware updates just keep improving it. Since acquiring the x100, my dslr's haven't seen the light of day & I'm in no hurry to get the xpro-1. Eventually I'll pick one up. By all reports I've read, the xpro-1's AF is faster than the x100(and will get faster with fw updates). Of course it will be a problem for some, but doesn't make me shy away one bit. As for manual focusing- I wouldn't bother with the Fuji fly-by-wire lenses. I'll just mount Leica, Contax, Zeiss or Pentax FA ltds((43mm & 77mm), end of story. So for me- AF speed: not a problem. Manual focus: not a problem. Image quality, High ISO, size, build & price: definitely not a problem. Looks: better than anything out there(except Leica).

I think the manual focus problem is more to do with the difficulty of focussing when the lens automatically stops down to a smaller stop than you want to shoot at. Have you tried it at say f8 - almost impossible. The GH2 I have is a joy to focus manually. I'm sure they will sort this out though

Not sure I follow your logic here. The APS sensor has more depth of field at any given f-stop then FF, which I should have thought in general would be MORE useful for landscape and less useful for portraits.

FF is more useful for landscapes because you generally have wider lenses available. Not for any other reason. As a format it doesn't make much of a difference. It's more about the selection of glass than anything else. If Fuji releases an ultra wide 10mm with minimal distortion, then the camera will be great for landscapes as well.

I certainly wish the Xpro1 was a FF camera, but I can live with APS-C.

I've the M8.2 (+summilux 35mm, elmarit 24mm, ...) and it drives me nuts. I bought it for street and travel work, but I always end up in situations where 640ISO is not enough (any ISO setting higher is absolutely unusable) and of course I'm spoiled by my Nikon D3 high ISO capabilities. Also the default color/tone is magenta-ish and not really pleasant (luckily Aperture helps a lot correcting this). Bad moire, due to no low pass filter. The batteries are archaic and last only a few hours (and during a recent shoot at -8C not more than 15m). Of course, it is beautifully built and the lenses are the best. Therefore I jumped on the X-Pro1 (hopefully finally coming this week) in desperation, innovative sensor with top high ISO capability fixing most of the M shortcomings. I also ordered the M adapter so I can use my M glass. I am sure Fuji will address most shortcomings in firmware updates (MF focus peaking, etc, etc). Wait and hope.

Was going to pickup this camera with the 35mm lens. It would cost me about $2300, but instead found a used Leica M8 w/Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 for $2400 altogether. Don't know how this camera handles, but it definitely has more features and maybe even better low light. Looking at some of the sample pictures from the x-pro 1 here, they don't impress me much. I know it really depends on what you're shooting, but is there any Leica M8 shooters that would prefer the x-pro 1 over the M8? Just curious?

"maybe better in low light"? There's no maybe about it. M8 starts to suck over iso 640. Fuji xpro-1 looks awesome up to iso 6400. Big difference between 640 & 6400. And you can mount that Voigtlander and any other m mount to it. There's even a review out there by a Leica guy who says focussing Leica lenses is better/easier on the xpro-1 using evf than on the native M9 in low light. And that's kind of a big deal...

Can you give the link of the guy that reviewed the Leica lens on the X-pro 1, I wanna check him out? I am really thinking about picking up the Fuji, if not then a Nex-7. My local camera store does not have a demo one yet.

What it clearly needs, then, is a rangefinder. It could be mechanical, or some electronic gizmo, but to have these beautiful lenses that you can't easily focus manually with the OVF basically takes this system out of the game as far as I am concerned.

Well the Pentax K-01 has a stunningly fast autofocus. Takes many lenses, including modern Zeiss manual focus ones.

No, they're not really competitors, but I think Pentax may be on to something with being able to use so many lenses. And with the Pentax I actually like having the thick body to grab. (Pentax was silly to not provide some possibility of an EVF.)

I'd hardly say that the K-01's AF is "stunningly fast." Besides, in the near future, I think a lot of other DSLRs are going to lose the mirror as well, and the K-01 will just be a footnote in history.

Plus, there are plenty of other cameras that take "many lenses." In fact, Canon EOS bodies can actually take more lenses than the Pentax K bodies because the EOS mount has a shorter lens registration distance than the K mount (Canon EOS= 44mm, Pentax K= 45.46mm). That means more lenses from more systems can be adapted to a Canon EOS body using adapters than the Pentax K-01. So if there was any company that was "onto something with being able to use so many lenses", it was Canon when they introduced the EOS mount in 1987. I think they purposely chose a short lens registration distance (shorter than most other camera systems at that time) so their bodies could accommodate other lenses.

There's a "huge market" for a camera that can use Canon's FD lenses?!? For a lens system that hasn't been in the market for 25 years? Who the heck is still using, or still owns, Canon FD lenses? That is definitely not a "huge market". It's a practically non-existent market. That's why Canon isn't going to make a camera for their long-dead FD lens system: hardly anyone would buy such a camera.

On top of that, what's the point of designing and marketing a camera for a lens system that you no longer support, and no longer make lenses for? It's just not enough to make money off of the camera body; you also want to make money off of lens sales, which Canon would obviously not be doing since they no longer make or sell FD lenses. The same goes for Nikon and their manual focus lenses.

Besides, I don't think many of those ancient, out-dated film lenses would hold up too well to today's high resolution sensors. Today's users expect better.

For the former, you have to figure out how to implement the "rangefinding" business with lenses that do not report the focus distance back to the camera. (only Nikon AF-D and later do) It's doable with a PD sensor, but that brings you back to a mirror again, at which point you might as well be using a TTL finder, aka a dSLR.

I am a long-time Canon user with a bunch of FD manual focus lenses. I use them (with a Novoflex adapter) on my Olympus PEN micro 4/3 cameras. They work great. The 85mm f:1.2 in particular makes a great low-light telephoto lens for a m4/3 camera. When I switched to digital, I thought about selling my FD lenses. Now, I'm glad that I didn't. m4/3 has given them a new utility.

My last excellent Fuji purchase was the S602Z. Their cameras have gone downhill as far as I'm concerned. The S6000fd was an "almost great" camera, and I really like what they tried to do with the S5 Pro (I wish they hadn't stopped at the S5), but I really wish that Fuji would come out with something worthy to compete against Canon, Nikon and Sony both in DSLRs and compacts. I really, really like how Fuji does color (more so with the S2 Pro than the S5 Pro - the S5 Pro lost most of that special Fuji color touch). But I'm thinking that unless they come up with some serious advances in AF and movie mode, this won't happen any time soon. =(

It does produce pretty good photos, but way to get there will drive you nuts.. This camera buyer needs quite a bit of money and much more patience. Sure, Fuji will fix some issues eventually, but for example build quality wont be this case..

Rather buy NEX-5N, much less problems, much more camera for that price (or NEX-7 if you really need a lot of mpix).

"About crappy controls. Well NEX-5N is improved in this department and personaly I need it just to set shutter speed and ISO (and perhaps exposure compensation). F-stops and focusing is on the lens. :D"

- fuji gives you direct access to all exposure controls you need - you don't have to turn camera on to see what your settings are

"Can you focus Leica M lens on X-Pro 1 without problems? Can you use Canon L? Nikon G? Contax G? I doubt that."

- yes, KIPON announced adapters for all mounts you've mentioned, Fuji will release M mount adapter. when it comes to focusing, various reports suggested it's all good but everybody would welcome 'focus peaking' - we never know, maybe Fuji will update FW to include it, but I fully agree that when it comes to Manual focus aids, Sony has an edge here

"Thats why NEX is better, cause it gives you possibilities, not limitations.."

Unfortunately, I think that was the point. I think it would have gone against the aesthetic retro theme to have made a contoured grip molded into the front body plate. That would have been sacrilege. I think the point was, indeed, to make it look like a flat-front rangefinder body with a grip patched onto it.

Clearly, Fuji was pretty slavish to the retro theme. After all, they did use a faux self-timer lever to switch between optical and electronic viewfinder modes! And they put the AF-assist LED light exactly where the rangefinder triangulation window would be! So they obviously would not have wanted to give the front body plate a modern-looking molded-in grip. Just be thankful that they gave the camera a grip at all.

I'm not impressed by the X-Pro. Yet again Fuji has demonstrated it's inability to provide cutting edge AF and saddled the camera with a number ergonomic quirks that render it a curiosity at best. Some of the points highlighted beggar belief, that Fuji could get it so wrong. They've always had the IQ, but they can't make a complete package IMO and their FW sucks. And don't get me started on Sillypix, it's plain terrible to use and it's output is mediocre for detail and colour.

Let's put this sensor in an OM-D and use the NEX-7 EVF for the best camera available.

You have to compare it to it's main competitor the Leica M9 - the most overrated camera (body, not lenses) in history - and in that case the Fuji kills it. And in all honest at any ISO gives the FF kings at Canon and Nikon a good toweling. Still dont like the design much though and probably agree with most of your other complaints.

You might call it "getting it wrong", but clearly Fuji wanted to "get it" to look, feel, and handle like an old-school rangefinder camera, ergonomic quirks and all. Maybe Fuji was a bit slavish to the retro theme, but I don't think this is a camera meant for everyone. Some will love it, some will hate it. C'est la vie.

I don't like the "old" rangefinder look. The Leica market can't be that big. They should modernize the camera and target those interested in cameras like the Sony NEX-7 or Nikon D7000. They should be able make much more money that way.

@Dan, first of all, the "Leica market" isn't "that big" because a Leica M9 is $7000! There are no inexpensive Leica-esque options-- at least not until now with the X-Pro1.

Secondly,you're forgetting the "boutique" factor that comes with making a Leica-esque camera. It allows them to charge more for these cameras, attracts a higher end buyer, and sell each camera for a bigger profit. The profit margin on mass-market cameras like the NEX-7 and D7000 have a much lower profit margin. Secondly, by positioning their camera as a "boutique" camera is that they don't have to compete directly with an NEX-7 or D7000. So in many ways, it was a smart move for Fuji. Rather than jumping into the crowded, mass-market area of the market, they are targeting the more premium market.

This camera is slow in operation, has too many buttons, short battery life, off center tripod mount, impossible to change battery/card when on tripod, no real manual focus, low reliability, has "Pro" on paper, but not really.

After watching how slow the Fuji focus-by-wire lenses are to operate in manual focus mode, I can't see where this camera fits into a street/travel camera role. AF performance is poor for a 2012 camera. Manual focusing is poor too. Even if the MF assist can be fixed in firmware, can the turn-turn-turn slow rate of manual focus in the Fuji lenses be fixed too?

But how fast does focus really need to be for street/travel photography? I think the AF should be sufficient for that type of photography. Not fast enough for shooting fast action, but I think it should be fine for street/travel. Plus, the old stand-by for street photography is zone focusing or pre-focusing.

I don't think this camera is really meant to be a blazing fast camera. It's definitely a throw-back camera to an age of slower shooting. Take it or leave it, I guess.

Guys love your reviews but subject of your samples after you moved from London to Seattle....so depressing. Seattle just cannot be compared to London when it comes to picture taking. You are running of ideas there. Can't you guys ask remaining people in London to take sample photos for you. Seattle is boring.

This may be a great camera but... it is badly let down by it's 'retro-rangefinder' styling. What is it with the Japanese? Designers are being churned out of educational establishments by the million and all Fujifilm can come up with is more 'I wanna look like a Leica'. This has just go to stop, put your faith in new and talented designers, stop churning out this retro rubbish, create a product that is worthy of the technology inside! (please:)

Well, conversely, there are a lot of "I wanna look like a melted soap bar" cameras out there. Besides, it's not as if there are tons of cameras with this "retro-rangefinder" styling. So I'm not sure what you're complaining about. It's actually rather unique in the market. Your point might have a bit more validity if every camera looked like the X-Pro1. But clearly, that is not the case.

However, it's clear that Fuji was very intent on making a retro-style camera-- maybe to a fault. Nevertheless, there's certainly room for it in the market. After all, how many other cameras are there that are like it? Not everyone can afford to spend $7000 for a Leica M9.

I love the Fuji film emulation settings. Fuji vs Kodak. Wow, what a difference in companies. If Kodak weren't so inept, it could have been Kodak producing this kind of camera, with Kodak film emulation modes (Kodachrome mode, etc.).

I've had the camera and all the lenses for 2 weeks and am enjoying it tremendously as a highly competent lightweight alternative to the D3s based kit I use for the majority of my work.

I agree with your comment about fast lens changes being a challenge - something I have pointed out on the forum here. If the hoods locked in place, they could provide useful real estate for this, but all that happens is that you end up removing the hood! The rectangular lens caps are the least effective solutions that could have been devised!

I detest the aperture blade chatter and would love to disable that. CAF is also a little unreliable so would like to see some improvement . The exposure compensation dial needs a lock - it moves when going in and out of the bag quite often, which can result in quickly grabbed shots being wrongly exposed

Other than that, IMV probably the best camera available of it's type. I do not regard the M9 as a comparable really - pointlessly expensive and not AF.

I really want to love this camera, I have been so excited for Fujifilm ever since the X100. Handling the camera was great but I couldn't get over the clumsy operation and slow AF. Still waiting, wanting to get a good trial on this system before finally getting a NEX-7 and start building the compact system based on Sony instead. Big problem, people look great with "rangefinderesque" cameras because they smile at the retro look and feel...

I have an X-Pro1 and it is very very good. Most oustanding feature: image quality. Simply superb. I have another 16MP camera where the anti-aliasing filter is retained, and at 100% crop its very clear that the Fuji retains a lot more detail. At more sensible image sizes the Fuji's output just comes across as subtly intagibly better.

There is the odd --minor-- issue with performance. One is the buffer fills up very fast with high speed continuous shooting. You only get about two seconds worth at 6FPS. Another is that when using manual A and T with auto ISO, the camera overexposes quite a lot. Perhaps I am doing something wrong?

Like cesaregal below, I love this camera. I have waited a long time to be able to get a camera that produces results comparable or better than slide film. This is it. Good job Fujifilm.

Fuji are to be applauded for creating their range of high quality X cameras. While the Leica M9 undoubtedly has a certain cachet, and very fine lenses (at a very high price), surely it is the X-Pro 1 that really delivers, and a t a more realistic price too?For photographers who want to work with an alternative to a dSLR, this must be The camera of the moment. And just think what the X-Pro2 might be like?!

Thanks - great preview with a good information on important functionality but more importantly your perspective on how well it delivers.

Mine is in transit right now and I'm really looking forward to getting out shooting with it. I'm really happy with the type of cameras Fuji is making with the X lineup. Kudos to Fuji for thinking about the enthusiast market.

I'd love to see this CFA on something like the D800 or A900 sensor. Unfortunately, I doubt that will ever happen.

Fuji has, as they often do, made something rather interesting, but of limited use to most people. I predict it will hit shelves and then drop in price 50% within a year. That is the Fuji way with digital gear. (with these X things being the only exceptions so far)

Okay, I see where you wrote that, but I still don't understand why you'd make claims about Fuji price decreases knowing full well that the claim would be untrue for X series cameras while at these same time commenting on an X series camera.

How about instead: X series Fujis seem to hold their retail price, unlike other Fuji digital cameras. Maybe the X series cameras will finally drop in price a bit in the next 12 months, I'll have to wait and see.

That would be an incorrect statement too. The X models haven't been available long enough or in decent supply long enough to have a clear picture. I said they're holding better than usual for now. Once supply meets demand, we'll see.

I'm sure that Fuji is capable of making some superb gear, and they have in the past. However, most people on the market for a digital camera consider Fuji a cheap also ran.

Don't get me wrong, I really like a lot of things about this Fuji. The price is not one of them, and I don't think anything I've seen yet justifies it.

Time will tell, and the proof of the pudding will be in the tasting. (my tasting, not DPR's)

I can't understand why people keep saying that x100 has so many oddities. I think it's quite easy to handle, it took me about half hour to figure out how it works. Afterwards I looked through the manual and founded some great tips to make some shortcuts.

Let's see...The M9 is MF only, does not have the hybrid VF, shoots 2 fps max and costs 5 times as much ( for both the body and the lenses). I imagine Fuji could compete with Leica if they wanted to make a camera body that costs $8k, but they decided to price it within the reach of poor schmucks like me.

I do love that this camera is being compared to Leica, though. You can get the camera and all three lenses for less than the price of a single Leica lens, never mind the body, and yet people are clamoring to compare it to the M9. More power to Fuji. I'm sure there are no Leica owners quaking in their boots out there, as there is no way that this camera will be able to out Leica a Leica. It looks to be an interesting entrant into the market, though, and I, for one, am looking forward to getting mine.

Well I can't buy it. Wish it all the success. There has to be something for people who can't have a Leica. This I guess will be the closest.Kudos to Fuji for churning up the field.Canon and Nikon, learn something.

Is performance at high ISOs your main criterion for selecting a camera? I don't know about you, but most of my shooting is at ISOs of 1200 or less, and the M9 perform very well there, thank you. On the occasional times I need to go higher, Noiseware Pro is my friend.

Let's wait to compare shots at low ISO where most of us shoot before burying the M9...

If a camera produced acceptable results at 25,600 ISO, I'd use it. With action, if you can stop down, you can worry less about nailing focus and concentrate more on the important things like framing and exposure.

The fact that this camera doesn't offer higher than 6400 ISO in raw mode is just silly.

Just because YOU don't know how to use a feature doesn't mean it's useless. High ISOs have a place.

Get over it then; you're not actually shooting in lowlight. You may think you are, but no. Lowlight would not be someone well illuminated by a light with a very dark background, say in a nightclub. (Generally this is one of the problems with the DPReview studio setup; there are no supremely dark shadows containing objects; it's a bright scene.)

Another problem with the M9 is that the shutter is way too audible. Konica had no problem making a rangefinder with a quiet metal shutter and quiet film advance. Leica shouldn't either, now 12 years after that Konica film camera. And Leica would only need to quiet the shutter and shutter reset.

I'll defend the colour and sharpness of Leica glass against nearly all challenges, none of that means I think high ISO is not very important and not a big failure on the part of the Leica M9--S2 also.

Look until about 2003 I wasn't won over by digital (though I liked being able to shoot forever and email quickly) but then Canon started to ship consumer DSLRs that could easily shoot at ISO 800, then I knew film was basically over for daily photography.

Leica didn't catch on, and still doesn't appear to remember what people used the M6 to do. That's shoot discretely in lowlight.

Great preview, thanks. You really covered most of the questions I had about the camera. The sample images are excellent as well. I am amazed at the quality of the Hi ISO shots.Those wide aperture lenses really make the photog think about depth of field in the scene. I have to admit it has been a really long time since i have had to do that!I look forward to the full review.